83. You are confusing the commerce clause and the second amendment.

Up until now, you were claiming that a federal gun registry would violate the commerce clause, not the second amendment. As far as the commerce clause, NFA proves that the federal government is within its rights to regulate private in-state transfers.

Now you're changing your story and claiming it violates the second amendment. This is also false, because registering guns does not prevent people from owning them. Also, there are plenty of examples of gun registries at the state and local level, like Hawaii and DC, and since states are bound by 2A also, then obviously these prove that gun registries are not a violation of 2A. So, while NFA is not second amendment precedent for an overall gun registry, such precedent exists in these other laws. Remember, even your buddy Scalia has conceded that there are limits on 2A.

Are you suggesting that all private sales of guns are used in gun trafficking?

I'm saying that private gun sales have a substantial effect on gun trafficking, which is enough to justify regulation at the federal level.

Guns are property, are they not? Does a gun registry allow the gov't to know what you own? Let's review the 4th amendment again:

Yeah, the fourth amendment says you can't be searched without probably cause. That has absolutely nothing to do with a registry. Registries don't involve searches and seizures. Again, since NFA is a registry, if the 4th amendment prevented registries, then NFA would be unconstitutional.